Project Syndicate: a World of Ideas
This opinion piece is written by a member of Britain’s House of Lords and a Professor Emeritus of Political Economy at Warwick University. In the article, Skidelsky endorses a universal basic income as a solution to the lesser-demand for labor in the post-Great-Recession world.
It’s online at:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/skidelsky41/English
It is also available as audio at:
Basic Income Studies (BIS) has announced the recent publication of one issue of the journal. The contents of the issue is below. BIS issues are available for free sampling at https://www.bepress.com/bis. Click the required article and follow the instructions to get free guest access to all BIS publications.
CONTENTS OF VOLUME 5, ISSUE 2 (2010)
‘Behavioral Economics and the Basic Income Guarantee’ by Wesley J. Pech
Abstract: This article provides a critical discussion of the potential contributions behavioral economics makes to the idea of a Basic Income Guarantee (BIG). Behavioral economics suggests that the consequences of a basic income may be significantly different from the ones predicted by the Standard Economic Model. Three topics from this literature are analyzed and linked to the BIG idea: Prospect Theory, Motivation Crowding Theory, and Conspicuous Consumption. The article argues that a basic income may be efficiency enhancing under some conditions, but at the same time incentives related to positional concerns may increase wasteful expenditure following its implementation.
‘Working Through the Work Disincentive’ by Chandra Pasma
Abstract: The work disincentive appears to be one of the biggest obstacles to basic income. There are concerns about paying people for doing nothing and fears of people withdrawing from the labor market because they have income security. It is important therefore for basic income advocates to understand the arguments and assumptions underlying the work disincentive concerns in order to successfully counter them. This article considers the primary assumptions, including those about what motivates people to work, what activities count as good, job availability, the distinction between the disabled and those able to work, and whether it is wrong to pay people for doing nothing; this article also provides a critical assessment.
‘Basic Income and Social Value’ by Bill Jordan.
Abstract: This article suggests that the justification of basic income should take account of the evidence of a divergence between growing incomes and stagnating subjective well-being (SWB) in the affluent countries. It argues that this implies taking the debate outside the orthodox model of economic development and the strict methodological individualism adopted by Van Parijs and others. This demands more attention to social relations and an analysis in terms of the production of social value rather than utility and culture rather than contract.
Research Note: ‘Seigniorage as a Source for a Basic Income Guarantee’ by Nicolaus Tideman and Kwok Ping Tsang
Abstract: A basic income guarantee should be financed from a source to which all persons have equal rights. One such source is seigniorage, the profit from printing paper money. This article reports real seigniorage, measured in 2009 dollars, for the U.S. for the past 50 years. It averaged about $175 per year per person over the age of 20. Thus seigniorage would not have been a major source for a basic income guarantee. But three caveats are in order. First, a practice of giving every adult an equal share of money would have meant a lifetime, interest-free loan of about $4,000 per adult. Second, the Federal Reserve’s response to the crisis at the end of 2008 would have meant an additional loan of about $3,400 per adult for the duration of the crisis. Third, a monetary system without fractional reserve banking would probably entail much greater seigniorage.
‘Review of Robert F. Clark, Giving Credit Where Due: A Path to Global Poverty Reduction’ by Edward Laws
‘Review of Loek Groot, Basic Income, Unemployment and Compensatory Justice’ by David J. Marjoribanks
AAPS & REDAIC (2010), Asignación Universal por Hijo para Protección Social Ciclo de Conferencias 2010, Buenos Aires: AAPS-Redaic, October 2010.
This book is a collection of papers and debates presented during the five sessions of the Conference organized during 2010 by the Red Argentina de Ingreso Ciudadano (BIEN’s National Affiliate) and the Asociación Argentina de Políticas Sociales, with the support of UNICEF Argentina. The main issue of the Conference was the evaluation of the Asignación Universal por Hijo para la protección social” [Universal Assignment for children] as a first step towards a Basic Income for all children in the country.
An electronic version can be downloaded in: www.ingresociudadano.org
ESTEVEZ, María Fernanda & GARCÉS, Laura (2010), El derecho a un Ingreso Ciudadano. Debates y experiencias en el mundo y la Argentina, San Juan: Editorial Fundación Universidad Nacional de San Juan, August 2010, 255 pp.
This book offers a review of recent discussions on Basic Income, and gives an overview of the debate in Argentina. The book examines the main rationales of the proposal and analyses different possible strategies in order to implement it. The book pays special attention to the debate about the proposal of a universal and unconditional Basic Income for Children in Argentina. More information: www.ingresociudadano.org
CHOI, Gwang-Eun (2011), Basic Income for Everyone: An Aspiring Project Shaking the Earth of the 21st Century, Seoul: Jong-Cheol Park Publishing Co., January 2011, 256 pages, ISBN: 978-89-85022-56-9 94330.
This book is the first introductory work on a basic income in Korea. Guy Standing, honorary co-president of BIEN and Nam-Hoon Kang, president of BIKN wrote their foreword especially for it.
It contains five chapters. The 1st chapter covers diverse experiences concerning a basic income such as the BI Law in Brazil, the BIG pilot project in Namibia, the PFD in Alaska, and the various ongoing disputes in Germany. The 2nd chapter introduces the theoretical and historical backgrounds of a basic income. The 3rd chapter discusses the Korean situation and is trying to find the way to implement a basic income in Korea. The 4th chapter argues that the new Korean disability pension be converted and integrated into a basic income. The 5th chapter consists of the two interviews with Guy Standing and Ozawa Shuji, president of BIJN, and author’s report on the 13th BIEN congress.
Gwang-Eun Choi is a committee member of BIKN and a former representative of the Socialist Party.
ITO, Makoto (2011), ‘Verifying the Basic Income Concept: Its Potency and Extent’ (‘Basic Income-ron wo kensho-suru: sono kanosei to genkai’), in Sekai [The World], Vol. 814, March 2011, published by Iwanami Shoten.
Due to growing financial deterioration of the government and weakened family ties and company welfarism, “new poverty” (such as an increasing number of “working poor”, single mothers and the elderly with low or no pension, etc., unable to respond to with existing social security schemes) is spreading in Japan. Against this situation, the Basic Income (BI) vision is drawing increasing attention. The interest in it, as for now, stays mainly in the academic circles specializing in social security studies. Though, tomes and answer books on BI have been published one after another. Basic Income Japan Network (BIJN) was launched in April 2010.
The definition of BI by Van Parijs is commonly referred to in Japan, and BI variants including proposals of ones at the supranational level have been brought to the knowledge. The background of the rise of the BI vision in the West consists of the blank wall of social welfare schemes developed during the high economic growth after the World-War 2 and employment policies based on the Keynesianism as well as the disappointment and antipathy to socialism of the Soviet-type. Meanwhile, neo-liberalism aspiring revitalization of individual liberty in free market has swept through the society. Under the circumstance, BI with individual payment, no means test and no work condition aspiring liberation of individuals from bureaucratic control attracts even libertarians. On the other hand, thinkers aiming at revitalization of socialism, feminists, ecologists, and so on support BI combining their own ideal with BI. In Japan, however, being introduced to BI about two decades later from the West, it is conceived as only an alternative to existing social security schemes, and few people discuss it in the aspect of social reformation thinking. Marxists have little contribution to the BI discussions.
As for the feasibility of BI in Japan, Shuji Ozawa first estimated in 2002. He conceived of a BI scheme at the level of 80, 000 JPY per person a month taking the levels of existing money grant schemes into account relying on a new revenue from raised income tax rate at the level of 50 % (maximum rate at that time was 37 %). When it is applied to a standard household with two parents and two children, their net income will decrease by 940 thousand JPY per year. But if the household has one more child, the loss will be almost cancelled. He later redesigned his BI scheme (at the level of 50,000 JPY per person a month) maintaining ongoing tax rate and integrating pension schemes with the BI. In the days ahead, design and discussions of BI schemes are expected. In any case, they may be gradual introduction of partial BI schemes. The newly born administration of the Democratic Party of Japan introduced a child benefit scheme without income test alternating the similar scheme at a far lower level with income test in 2010. The monthly amount per child is 13,000 JPY, a half of the amount the party promised in their manifesto for the lower-house election the party won. In the continuing budgetary distress, however, the administration is now giving up doubling the amount for over four-year-old children and is even bringing back income test. Thus, the partial BI scheme at entry level is still halfway in Japan.
BI can be conveniently used by neo-liberalists to further increase irregular employment, restrain wage and alternate company welfarrism with government expenditures. Therefore, one should not be in an autotelic approach toward BI but in unity with worker/citizen campaigns demanding upraise of wage level, employment security and improvement of public care services, and one should emphasize that BI is to complement public functions of a social-democratic welfare state and promote BI pursuance as part of social movement to realize such state.
Ito Makoto is Emeritus Professor at the University of Tokyo, and a Member of the Japan Academy. The above summary was written by Takeshi Suzuki.